Norway consumer group irate over Kindle, e-book tie-in

Norway's Consumer Council put pressure on Apple several years ago for "tying" …

Norway's Consumer Council, Forbrukerr�det, made a name for itself back in 2006 by going after Apple's iTunes Store with a vengeance. Now, it's eyeing Amazon and has expressed concerns about the Kindle's terms of service—some of which will sound familiar from the iTunes saga.

In a critique published on its website, Council head Hans Marius Graasvold said that the fine print in the Kindle's contract violated several provisions of Norwegian consumer protection law. For one thing, it establishes a bond between the content that a person buys and their Kindle—much as Apple used DRM for years to tie iTunes and the iPod.

The Council is an independent organization, but its complaint against Apple did receive official support from the country's Consumer Ombudsman, especially as it came to tying content to devices. Graasvold warns that the Council could well pursue another such complaint against Amazon. "We are currently waiting to hear how Amazon and Norwegian publishers will resolve this issue, but it does not rule out an 'iTunes2 ' case if we are not satisfied," he said.

Hans Marius Graasvold

Second, there's the possibility of being excluded from one's own library. It was already made clear in the 1984/Animal Farm debacle that Amazon has the ability and the willingness to control Kindle owners' access to content even after a sale, and Graasvold also points to a provision in which Amazon reserves the right to terminate the terms of service agreement entirely if customers violate the terms. "This can hardly be understood in any way other than that you, the customer, will no longer have access to the books or journals you purchased if you are suspected of having breached the agreement, for example by making an illegal copy," Graasvold said. "This means both a break with the way copyright violations are usually pursued and with ordinary common sense. It's inconceivable that [online store] Platekompaniet could take my record collection even though I was suspected of unlawful use of a CD I purchased from them."

The list continues. Graasvold also says that he is not pleased that Amazon:

Can change the agreement at any time, without advance notification

Doesn't have strong enough privacy protections on tracking what people buy and read, and what "changes and comments" they make to books on the device

Offers only a one or two year warranty (he'd be happier with five)

Makes it difficult to produce local backup copies of purchased works

The Apple situation was eventually resolved when Apple dropped most DRM from its music store, thus eliminating the "tying" issue. E-book publishers and sellers have so far shown little interest in doing something similar, however.

Amazon finds itself in a curious position with the Kindle. When Apple came to dominate the music scene, growing so powerful that it could basically dictate terms ("All songs shall be 99 cents!") to the labels, Amazon capitalized on label outrage and offered one of the first major music download stores with DRM-free major label content. Now that it has a successful device of its own, it appears to be taking a page from Apple's early strategy. Whether the DRM decree comes down from the content providers or not, the effect is the same: tying content to a device and thereby providing a powerful disincentive to migrate to another device in the future.

I expect that, like Apple, Amazon will happily dispense with DRM as soon as there's a way to get content providers to offer it.

In the meantime, it's served Amazon's main purpose well: generating the largest collection of books for the Kindle that they could. If they had limited themselves to DRM-free books, the selection would be considerably different.

It's not the USA vs the world. most other countries have similar laws, and some are much stricter than those in the US.

Just look to the new "Three Strikes" law in France. We would never see something like that passed here.

And the problem in Europe about iTunes was the fault of European laws, not Apple.

Folks living in the EU seems to think that there is one law that binds them all, when the opposite is often true. Countries regularly ignore EU laws if their own laws give their companies an advantage.

In the case of music publishers, and publishers of movies, TV, and print, each country has its own organizations to collect and negotiate license fees, and companies like Apple and Amazon must go along with it. Apple was cleared of all charges in that case, and the problems were put at the step of EUROPEAN countries and their own laws and organizations.

Anyone who thinks that Apple liked having DRM is out of the loop. Same thing with Amazon. They've been forced to use DRM. That's the case in Europe, where certain laws are far stricter than they are in the US, and where, in the US, we have one entity across the country negotiating licensees and royalties, in Europe, there are dozens.

You may not realize it, but in some European countries, even the price of books are regulated by the government—no discounts allowed for at least 18 months, and sometimes much longer. Like paying list for all books? Tough, you have no choice. We do here.

How does the Barnes and Noble ebook system compare to Amazon's on these issues? I'm considering picking up the ridiculously named Nook when it comes out at the end of November instead of a Kindle.

Amazon is taking a page from Apple's iTunes. You can share a book with four other Nook users, though not at the same time, which Apple's devices allow. Amazon only allows books to be read on the one device.

Anyone who thinks that Apple liked having DRM is out of the loop. Same thing with Amazon. They've been forced to use DRM.

Yes, that is what I heard too, from very senior sources in the industry, including people at Apple. Actually, what Apple really always wanted was a totally open platform. So what they wanted was for iTunes to be just like CDs. You would have been able to buy your Tunes by using the package of your choice, no need to use iTunes unless you wanted to. There would have been an open interface to the iPod, it would have been published, and anyone would have been able to write packages to manage the databases on iPods. Once you had bought your Tunes, you'd have been able to move them to any player, because Apple wanted to give away its DRM to the industry. Then, they desperately wanted all this stuff to work with Linux, because of course they are devoted to Open Source. After all, OSX is based on an Open Source kernel.

I got to tell you, people who are in the know on this, as they told me about it, they were just absolutely amazed and impressed at how deeply committed Apple was to openness, and how far sighted the guys in Cupertino really were. It was quite different from how its represented.

But alas, the media and content companies vetoed all of this. I hear that Steve was most upset, threw a few chairs around, when it turned out he could not, no way, change their minds. The media companies were especially adamant about Linux support. They simply would not wear it. And so we ended up with this dreadful locked down situation, which of course, Apple has relaxed as fast as it possibly could.

The same thing applies to the tie of OSX to Apple hardware. You would not believe if you did not have my own high level contacts just how much Apple hates being made to sue hackintosh makers. I cannot reveal to you exactly who it is that is forcing them to do this, because it was told me in strictest confidence. But its a fact. They desperately want to be able to free OSX from their own brand, and they have always wanted to do this. But sinister forces are compelling them not to. And what is worse, those same sinister forces are making them keep quiet about it.

It goes on and on, this dreadful conspiracy against Apple, and the last and worst episode was of course the App store. What Apple wanted was for anyone to be able to sell any apps they wanted to. Apple would then just have a certification program, so some apps would be marked 'certified by Apple'. But powerful industry forces would not have any of it, and forced them to tie the phone to the App store, and also forced them to use iTunes as the purchase instrument. Which of course they had no objection to doing this, but what they were forced to do against their will was to make that the only way of getting apps. They were even forced to tie the phone to one particular network. Unspeakable!

I think something similar must have happened to Amazon with Kindle. These two great companies are being driven into the ground by these sinister conspirators. Those of us who care about such things should act now to put a stop to it. I think we also need to think about Microsoft. People always think MS is very powerful, but I hear that Steve Ballmer did not want to make Explorer part of Windows, but was compelled to do it. Before that, Bill Gates really wanted to be able to allow Windows to work with DRDos. He just could not persuade them.

It is truly terrible how much these great creative companies are at the mercy of dark forces, and we need to recognize it and stand up for them. They are for us, for freedom, and we need to help them.

Free the Kindle, free Amazon, and free Apple and Microsoft too, while we are at it!

Originally posted by Ally:They desperately want to be able to free OSX from their own brand, and they have always wanted to do this. But sinister forces are compelling them not to. And what is worse, those same sinister forces are making them keep quiet about it...

Those of us who care about such things should act now to put a stop to it.

What exactly can we do about it when we don't even know who these "sinister forces" are?

Originally posted by Ally:They desperately want to be able to free OSX from their own brand, and they have always wanted to do this. But sinister forces are compelling them not to. And what is worse, those same sinister forces are making them keep quiet about it...

Those of us who care about such things should act now to put a stop to it.

What exactly can we do about it when we don't even know who these "sinister forces" are?

Originally posted by Deviation:How does the Barnes and Noble ebook system compare to Amazon's on these issues? I'm considering picking up the ridiculously named Nook when it comes out at the end of November instead of a Kindle.

Actually it has open DRM standards. They have already said they are using a variation on Adobe's DRM setup and after the first of the year will be releasing the standards for it so that any other eBook maker can implement it into their readers.

How is Amazon's content tied to the Kindle? Amazon typically offers multiple versions of a book: hardcover, paperback, audio CD, and e-book (Kindle). If you want a different e-book format, you are free to shop elsewhere.

I hate these illogical attacks on businesses. Some people expect that Amazon should help competitors such as SONY or that Apple should help competitors such as Microsoft. This is like expecting you to provide a mugger with leather gloves so he doesn't skin his knuckles while he's bashing your face.

Originally posted by tetrault:How is Amazon's content tied to the Kindle? Amazon typically offers multiple versions of a book: hardcover, paperback, audio CD, and e-book (Kindle). If you want a different e-book format, you are free to shop elsewhere.

I hate these illogical attacks on businesses. Some people expect that Amazon should help competitors such as SONY or that Apple should help competitors such as Microsoft. This is like expecting you to provide a mugger with leather gloves so he doesn't skin his knuckles while he's bashing your face.

This way:

quote:

For one thing, it establishes a bond between the content that a person buys and their Kindle—much as Apple used DRM for years to tie iTunes and the iPod.

Second, there's the possibility of being excluded from one's own library. It was already made clear in the 1984/Animal Farm debacle that Amazon has the ability and the willingness to control Kindle owners' access to content even after a sale, and Graasvold also points to a provision in which Amazon reserves the right to terminate the terms of service agreement entirely if customers violate the terms. "This can hardly be understood in any way other than that you, the customer, will no longer have access to the books or journals you purchased if you are suspected of having breached the agreement, for example by making an illegal copy," Graasvold said. "This means both a break with the way copyright violations are usually pursued and with ordinary common sense. It's inconceivable that [online store] Platekompaniet could take my record collection even though I was suspected of unlawful use of a CD I purchased from them."

The list continues. Graasvold also says that he is not pleased that Amazon:

* Can change the agreement at any time, without advance notification * Doesn't have strong enough privacy protections on tracking what people buy and read, and what "changes and comments" they make to books on the device * Offers only a one or two year warranty (he'd be happier with five) * Makes it difficult to produce local backup copies of purchased works

Originally posted by tetrault:I hate these illogical attacks on businesses. Some people expect that Amazon should help competitors such as SONY or that Apple should help competitors such as Microsoft. This is like expecting you to provide a mugger with leather gloves so he doesn't skin his knuckles while he's bashing your face.

It's not about helping competitors. It's about helping you (the customer).

Of course, you're a stupid corporate slave, so you don't really deserve this help. But the rest of us realize that your attitude is akin to letting all muggers (Sony, Microsoft, Apple, etc.) bash the consumer's face. You may be "free to shop elsewhere", but, in the absence of consumer protection, it simply means that your face will be bashed by a different mugger.

Just don't buy the damned things! It's really that simple. Would we even be reading this article now if people were perceptive enough to just not buy them? Amazon would have no choice but to "change its tune" if people refused to buy them as they are now. Once again it's the gullible/impatient/uneducated consumers in the marketplace who are harming themselves, as well as the rest of us who DO know better.

We are ALL harmed by impatience and ignorance, not just those who possess those lovely qualities.

Originally posted by Ally:The same thing applies to the tie of OSX to Apple hardware. You would not believe if you did not have my own high level contacts just how much Apple hates being made to sue hackintosh makers. I cannot reveal to you exactly who it is that is forcing them to do this, because it was told me in strictest confidence. But its a fact. They desperately want to be able to free OSX from their own brand, and they have always wanted to do this. But sinister forces are compelling them not to. And what is worse, those same sinister forces are making them keep quiet about it.

Wait. There are sinister forces that prevent Apple from allowing users to use OSX on non-Apple hardware?

Once again it's the gullible/impatient/uneducated consumers in the marketplace who are harming themselves, as well as the rest of us who DO know better.

We are ALL harmed by impatience and ignorance, not just those who possess those lovely qualities.

Actually, your attitude is even more harmful than "impatience and ignorance". Unlike other consumers, you do know better, but simply let it happen. You can't expect every gullible/impatient/uneducated consumer to know as much about Amazon's products as Amazon itself knows, especially when you consider how many products an average person consumes and how complex these products may be. It simply isn't realistic, and that's why consumer protection should be a collective effort. And don't forget that, more often than not, your choice is very limited, so, figuratively speaking, you have a choice between being robbed by one of two muggers and never leaving your home.

Just look to the new "Three Strikes" law in France. We would never see something like that passed here.

Really? So, we're not in the process of secretly setting up a new treaty in regards to copyright? One for which we don't know if we will see a three strikes law or criminalization (aka incarceration) of casual piracy?

If you really believe that, I suggest you look up ACTA and ask yourself why it is that only corporate lobbyist lawyers and a few people working on the treaty are privilege to the information it contains. I somehow doubt a treaty on copyright in any way involves national security. Corporate security via forced legislation maybe.

I kind of like the idea of a Nook, but I have 25 Kindle ebooks that I'd basically have to toss if I bought one.

We need to drop DRM on ebooks, but we also need to avoid the whole mp3/file-sharing debacle if possible. I say digitally sign and encrypt each ebook with the buyer's name and address and credit card number.

You can share them with a friend if you want, but they'd better be a "good" friend.

Originally posted by ahmlco:I kind of like the idea of a Nook, but I have 25 Kindle ebooks that I'd basically have to toss if I bought one.

We need to drop DRM on ebooks, but we also need to avoid the whole mp3/file-sharing debacle if possible. I say digitally sign and encrypt each ebook with the buyer's name and address and credit card number.

You can share them with a friend if you want, but they'd better be a "good" friend.

As far as I can tell so far, the Barnes and Noble ebooks use exactly that method - when first opening the file you are asked to enter in the credit card number that was used to purchase the book. Seems fair and reasonable to me.

Originally posted by KpaBap: As far as I can tell so far, the Barnes and Noble ebooks use exactly that method - when first opening the file you are asked to enter in the credit card number that was used to purchase the book. Seems fair and reasonable to me.

Wow, that sounds painful! I often buy a book for my Kindle from here at my computer - and only hours later go find the Kindle and start reading - often in bed. Having to enter credit card info a second time, at that point, would suck.

Originally posted by Deviation:How does the Barnes and Noble ebook system compare to Amazon's on these issues? I'm considering picking up the ridiculously named Nook when it comes out at the end of November instead of a Kindle.

It looks much more open.

If I was a publisher with tons of Adobe DRM´ed books in my own online ebook shop there would be no way for me to have it read on the Kindle. They can be read on the Nook. And very soon I would be able to use the enhanced features (like lending). While I may still be dependent on Adobe, as a publisher and customer, I am much less unhappy with that than being totally tied into Amazons business model. As a customer I have the choice of many more ebook readers and shops, as a publisher I could sell books myself for any ebook reader (except the Kindle) or let any ebook seller have my ebooks in their inventory. With the Kindle Amazon cracks the whip over both customers and publishers.

And libraries mostly uses Adobes DRM, so the Nook is prepared for that as well. Not so with the Kindle.

WRT to Norway: If it is anything like here I say good for them. When the Kindle was released for international customers there was no end to the positive press: "Finally an electronic book reader in Denmark" (despite I have used several others here). No mention in the non-existing books in danish or the tie in to Amazon. If 100000 suddenly bought a Kindle, they would either forever be tied into the Amazon Kindle ecosystem or fell so taken advantage of they would never buy an "open" ebook, thus hampering the real opportunities of the ebook format.

Originally posted by tetrault:I hate these illogical attacks on businesses. Some people expect that Amazon should help competitors such as SONY or that Apple should help competitors such as Microsoft. This is like expecting you to provide a mugger with leather gloves so he doesn't skin his knuckles while he's bashing your face.

It's not about helping competitors. It's about helping you (the customer).

Of course, you're a stupid corporate slave, so you don't really deserve this help. But the rest of us realize that your attitude is akin to letting all muggers (Sony, Microsoft, Apple, etc.) bash the consumer's face. You may be "free to shop elsewhere", but, in the absence of consumer protection, it simply means that your face will be bashed by a different mugger.